Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2017 Oct 5;7(10):e016348.
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-016348.

Return-to-work intervention versus usual care for sick-listed employees: health-economic investment appraisal alongside a cluster randomised trial

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Return-to-work intervention versus usual care for sick-listed employees: health-economic investment appraisal alongside a cluster randomised trial

Suzanne Lokman et al. BMJ Open. .

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the health-economic costs and benefits of a guided eHealth intervention (E-health module embedded in Collaborative Occupational healthcare (ECO)) encouraging sick-listed employees to a faster return to work.

Design: A two-armed cluster randomised trial with occupational physicians (OPs) (n=62), clustered and randomised by region into an experimental and a control group, to conduct a health-economic investment appraisal. Online self-reported data were collected from employees at baseline, after 3, 6, 9 and 12 months.

Setting: Occupational health care in the Netherlands.

Participants: Employees from small-sized and medium-sized companies (≥18 years), sick-listed between 4 and 26 weeks with (symptoms of) common mental disorders visiting their OP.

Interventions: In the intervention group, employees (N=131) received an eHealth module aimed at changing cognitions regarding return to work, while OPs were supported by a decision aid for treatment and referral options. Employees in the control condition (N=89) received usual sickness guidance.

Outcomes measures: Net benefits and return on investment based on absenteeism, presenteeism, health care use and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained.

Results: From the employer's perspective, the incremental net benefits were €3187 per employee over a single year, representing a return of investment of €11 per invested Euro, with a break-even point at 6 months. The economic case was also favourable from the employee's perspective, partly because of QALY health gains. The intervention was costing €234 per employee from a health service financier's perspective. The incremental net benefits from a social perspective were €4210. This amount dropped to €3559 in the sensitivity analysis trimming the 5% highest costs.

Conclusions: The data suggest that the ECO intervention offers good value for money for virtually all stakeholders involved, because initial investments were more than recouped within a single year. The sometimes wide 95% CIs suggest that the costs and benefits are not always very precise estimates and real benefits could vary considerably.

Trial registration: NTR2108; Results.

Keywords: absenteeism; cost-benefit; ehealth; mental disorder; occupational health; return to work.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: SL, DV, MZV, BB, FS report personal fees from employment at the Trimbos Institute, the Netherlands Institute of Mental Health and Addiction, a not-for-profit organisation. CFC has received research grants from Eli Lilly outside the submitted work.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flowchart of the participants. CAU, care as usual. ECO, E-health module embedded in Collaborative Occupational health care.

References

    1. Lerner D, Amick BC, Lee JC, et al. . Relationship of employee-reported work limitations to work productivity. Med Care 2003;41:649–59. 10.1097/01.MLR.0000062551.76504.A9 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Adler DA, McLaughlin TJ, Rogers WH, et al. . Job performance deficits due to depression. Am J Psychiatry 2006;163:1569–76. 10.1176/ajp.2006.163.9.1569 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Moncrieff J, Pomerleau J. Trends in sickness benefits in Great Britain and the contribution of mental disorders. J Public Health Med 2000;22:59–67. 10.1093/pubmed/22.1.59 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Shiels C, Gabbay MB, Ford FM. Patient factors associated with duration of certified sickness absence and transition to long-term incapacity. Br J Gen Pract 2004;54:86–91. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Cattrell A, Harris EC, Palmer KT, et al. . Regional trends in awards of incapacity benefit by cause. Occup Med 2011;61:148–51. 10.1093/occmed/kqr008 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types